I think the inflation argument is that distributing more dollars would mean more buying power overall, increasing demand, and therefore cost of living increases.
That only makes sense when supply is inelastic, which is not a valid assumption, imo. I can imagine certain things, though, like housing, might be more successful as extracting additional rent from across the board income bumps.
That only makes sense when supply is inelastic, which is not a valid assumption, imo.
No, it makes sense whenever supply is not perfectly elastic. And time scales matter -- most supplies are inelastic over the short term but elastic over the long term, so "helicopter money" will tend to produce a short-term spike in prices due to more money chasing a limited supply, which then levels off at different rates depending on the goods as the supply catches up.
That only makes sense when supply is inelastic, which is not a valid assumption, imo. I can imagine certain things, though, like housing, might be more successful as extracting additional rent from across the board income bumps.